THought for the Day: Nuclear Deterent

[henry quirk]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Atomics, in the hands of those who won't use them, are worthless.

Say what you like about ORANGE MAN: when he telegraphed his willingness to bring atomics to bear, folks listened.

The House Plant, in contrast, can't even wipe his own bum: he's not a credible threat, conventionally or atomically.

[promethean75]

Lol. Putin would do nothing differently if that cockroach Trump were still president, because he knows damn well no first world country would ever start a nuclear war.

[henry quirk]

Lol. Putin would do nothing differently if that cockroach Trump were still president, because he knows damn well no first world country would ever start a nuclear war.

ORANGE MAN was credible in his threats; the House Plant is not.

[promethean75]

Lol. Putin would do nothing differently if that cockroach Trump were still president, because he knows damn well no first world country would ever start a nuclear war.

[promethean75]

The orange man - let's just call him the orangutan - would never push the red button, for two reasons. One, he'd only ever pretend like he'd do it. He'd talk like he wuz gonna, but that's just the natural sense of pomp and authority that comes with being pampered all his life, ordering people around and grabbing pussies. But there's nothing there. He's an over grown boy version of Veruca Salt, and he wouldn't dare launch a nuke fer real. Two, he is neither able nor allowed to think without his advisors, and they'd never let em do it.

[Skepdick]

No. Not really. And not relevant. The soviet military establishment had the laucnch codes and the guidance systems, until they were de-comissioned.

What is confusing you about the fact that before they declared independence there was no difference between "the soviet military establishment" and what is now "Ukraine"?

You seem to be impllying that within the USSR, Ukraine existed as a dependent on the "soviet military complex", and not as a part of it.

[Gary Childress]

Lol. Putin would do nothing differently if that cockroach Trump were still president, because he knows damn well no first world country would ever start a nuclear war.

ORANGE MAN was credible in his threats; the House Plant is not.

So Trump would have gotten us all into a nuclear war? Is that what you're saying? If so, then I'd rather Biden be in charge than bring on armageddon.

[Walker]

Have you not been watching the news since the beginning of the century?
EU/US hasbeen steadily pushing east without regard to Russian psychology. Part of that is helping instigate the right wing coup in 2014.

The premise that nukes aren't a deterrent sounds like a justification in the sense that, if nukes aren't a deterrent, then Ukraine giving up its nukes was no big deal.

It's not relevant, since the nukes in the Ukraine were under the control of Russia, when Ukraine was part of the Soviet.

After supplication with digital credits (aka money), to The Wiki, Wiki tells us:

"Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

"The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1]

"The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan."


To Wiki we say ... Oh Great Wiki ... An intent of westward, Russian expansionism into eastern Europe would make these promises conscious lies.

Indeed, they may have been, which would mean ...

So, the question remains. Why did nukes not deter Argentine in the Falklands war? Why did it not deter Vietnam, Laos, and Cambofia in their conflict with the USA? And why does it not deter Palestine's attacks on Isreal?
A weapon to terrible to use, is no use at all.

It's not relevant, since the nukes in the Ukraine were under the control of Russia, when Ukraine was part of the Soviet.

Finally, someone with the answers.

If nukes in Ukraine were not a factor in the defense of the Ukraine,
then why was an agreement necessary to replace nukes in Ukraine,
with the protections provided by three other countries,
before Ukraine agreed for the nukes to be removed?

If the protections of these other countries were not meant to benefit Ukraine, by replacing the protections of the nukes with the protections provided by the three other countries, then why was the agreement a necessary contingent for the nukes to be removed?

*

Is this threat by Putin a deterrent?

“To anyone who would consider interfering from outside: If you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history." *
- Putin

Apparently, yes it is a deterrent.
Reason being, the US is still buying oil from Russia, and allowing Russia to have its way with Ukraine.


* Fact checkers with an agenda would say, that is not a nuclear threat.

[Sculptor]

There is no war crime. If you think this is going to happen, then what about Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Grenada, Salvador.... Should I go on??
And what about our "allies", such as Saudi Arabis bombing the fuck out of Yemen?
Keep drinking the FOx News lies, it suits you.

It's basically the same thing that's been done to many Third world countries, now being done to an Eastastern European country. We can thank many idiot US Presidents and their advisors for giving away the moral high ground. Had baby Bush and Dickhead Cheney not fucked up so bad we'd be able to martial more moral support from the world. Instead the American electorate (probably many of the same ones who voted for Trump) didn't want Gore so they apparently got what they wished for, the potential undoing of the Western global economy.

Well I certainly agree here. The US has no moral authority. And can't seem to get its head out of its own exceptionalism and hypocrisy.
Where is the outrage concerning Yemen against out "friends" in Saudi?
And whilst the US stamps its feet over Ukraine it shall be Germany and the rest of Europe that most suffers from these sanctions against Russia, not so much the US.

[Sculptor]

So is the Nuclear deterent is so good, why the fuck has this not effective against Russia?

Atomics, in the hands of those who won't use them, are worthless.

Say what you like about ORANGE MAN: when he telegraphed his willingness to bring atomics to bear, folks listened.

The House Plant, in contrast, can't even wipe his own bum: he's not a credible threat, conventionally or atomically.

If so the only think about ORANGE man that made him seem effective was the fact that he was widely seen as what he is; a senile geriatric with an intellectual age of THREE.
That does not recommend him for any public office.

[Sculptor]

And if you were in any doubt about the lack of moral rectitude in the US's criticisms of Russia, here's a provisional list of countries' governments that since WW2 the US has tried to, or has managed to over throw.

ERROR file too large.


BRB

[Sculptor]

image_2022-02-25_115149.png

[Sculptor]

image_2022-02-25_115249.png

[henry quirk]

Remarkably, though, durin' his 4 years, Putin didn't do diddly.

In fact, durin' his 4 years, a whole whack of the sociopaths in power didn't do diddly.

Now? Russia takes Ukraine; China moves toward Taiwan; Islamists are gettin' noisy again.



-----

So Trump would have gotten us all into a nuclear war?

Nope. Smokin' Joe Biden, however, just might.

-----

That does not recommend him for any public office.

There's nuthin' to recommend any of TPTB for public office. Sociopaths and parasites: the lot (includin' ORANGE MAN).

None of that is relevant to my point: ORANGE MAN was a more credible threat, to Putin, on his worse day than the House Plant couid ever be on his best.

The evidence: durin' ORANGE MAN's 4, the other sociopaths largely shut the hell up and kept their hands to themselves.

Now: they're all out & about, struttin' and redrawin' maps.

-----

if you were in any doubt about the lack of moral rectitude in the US's criticisms of Russia

Not me. The United States (as opposed to America) is just as much a criminal enterprise as any other goverment. It has, as you say, no moral authority simply cuz it's an immoral exercise. Its various empire-buildin' monkeyshines are just the frostin' on the cake, and are no better or worse than what any other current or past iteration of The State has done.

[Sculptor]

None of that is relevant to my point: ORANGE MAN was a more credible threat, to Putin, on his worse day than the House Plant couid ever be on his best.

Orange man is a threat to no one.The only threat he represents is a threat to what is left of American democracy.

Orange man is certainly no threat to Putin as Orange man is too busy be a fucking cheerleader to Putin as his tanks roll westwards.